Campus Title VI Rights Campaign

Summary#

The Protecting Students on Campus Act of 2025 would create new duties for the Department of Education and colleges; it would also amend the Higher Education Act of 1965. Its stated goal is to raise awareness of rights under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and provide more information about discrimination complaints. The bill was introduced and referred to a House committee; it is not law.

  • The Education Department’s Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights must run a public awareness campaign about Title VI rights. The Department may run it itself or hire a qualifying nonprofit.
  • Colleges that participate in federal student aid programs would have to prominently link from their homepages to the Department’s page for filing Title VI complaints about race, color, or national-origin discrimination. They would also have to post the campaign materials each year in busy campus locations and on busy webpages.
  • Every college receiving federal funds would have to send the Education Department’s Inspector General an annual report on those complaints, including their number, substance, and the college’s response.
  • The Inspector General must annually audit colleges in the top 5% by per-capita complaint numbers, adjusted for student population, and study the gap between complaints filed with colleges and those filed with the Department’s civil-rights office.
  • For one year, the Assistant Secretary must brief Congress monthly on complaints received by that office, plans for handling them and related investigations, and how long complaints stay open. Written reports must protect personal information under applicable privacy laws.

What it means for you#

  • Students: Colleges covered by the student-aid requirement would have to display a complaint link and campaign materials. The bill does not change the rights provided by Title VI or create a new complaint-filing process.
  • Colleges: Student-aid participants would have the posting duties. All colleges receiving federal funds would have the separate annual reporting duty. The bill does not say that a complaint is proof of discrimination.
  • Education Department: Its civil-rights office would have to run the campaign and provide monthly information to Congress for a year. The Inspector General would have to collect reports, conduct audits, and complete the study.
  • Congress: It would receive monthly briefings and written reports. The bill does not require the Department to resolve complaints within a set time.

Money#

No cost estimate is provided in the supplied material.

  • The bill requires campaign work, college reporting, audits, a study, and monthly briefings, but gives no cost or staffing figures.
  • It does not state an appropriation or create a fee, fine, or benefit.

What is unclear#

  • The Higher Education Act itself was not supplied, so the bill’s exact interaction with current student-aid requirements could not be verified.
  • The bill does not specify how colleges must count or classify complaints, or how the Inspector General must adjust complaint rates for student population.
  • It does not set a process, deadline, or privacy rules for colleges’ annual reports.
  • It does not say what happens if a college fails to meet the new student-aid conditions or reporting duty.
  • Apart from the start deadline for congressional briefings, the bill does not give a general effective date or timeline for the other duties.

Case for#

  • A required campus campaign and homepage link could make students more aware of Title VI rights and where to complain.
  • Annual college reports could give the Inspector General information about how colleges handle complaints, not just how many are filed with the federal office.
  • Comparing college and federal complaint numbers could help identify gaps in how complaints reach the federal office.
  • Regular briefings would give Congress information about complaint volume, investigations, and how long cases remain open.

Case against#

  • Colleges and federal offices would have new reporting and administrative duties, but the bill provides no cost estimate or staffing plan.
  • Complaint counts do not show by themselves whether discrimination occurred or whether a college handled a complaint properly. The bill does not explain how the audits should account for that.
  • The bill requires reporting and study but does not set deadlines for resolving complaints or require a particular response to audit findings.
  • It is unclear how the Inspector General would protect sensitive information in colleges’ reports; the bill expressly requires privacy protections for reports to Congress, but does not specify similar protections for college submissions.